Observations focused on the problems of an underdeveloped country, Venezuela, with some serendipity about the world (orchids, techs, science, investments, politics) at large. A famous Venezuelan, Juan Pablo Perez Alfonzo, referred to oil as the devil's excrement. For countries, easy wealth appears indeed to be the sure path to failure. Venezuela might be a clear example of that.

The way in which Chavez addressed the Board of the Central Bank and in particular his President Diego Luis Castellanos, telling them to resign and making clumsy personal allusions to the last one, define with clarity not only the autocratic nature of his personality, his absolute scorn for democratic values, but also his total lack of consideration, in the pure human plane, with his collaborators. Power has gone to his head.

Chavez can not conceive any relationship with him other than subordination. He does not want collaborators, he wants servants. The slightest whisp of autonomy in his surroundings drives him crazy and he rapidly draws the pistol of his insults. Castellanos as well as the rest of the members of the Board of the Central bank were appointed by Chavez. But it was enough for them to contradict him, for them to fall in disgrace.

Chavez says that the Central Bank is not Castellanos. Of course not. Neither is Chavez.

These gentlemen have a criterion, different from that of the President on the topic of the foreign exchange earnings. Whether they are right or not is not the problem, because that is not the essence of the problem. The essence is that Chavez does not tolerate that anybody differ with him, nor is he capable of debating calmly and persuasively with those that differ with him. He loses his cool and releases things as coarse as the allusion to Castellanos’ age which, according to him, is already a “little old man” who should go home and wear slippers, instead of resisting his requests. Indelicately and threatenly he pointed out that if he had to be jailed, he would have his home as prison, given his age. (By the way, with that type of disqualification, old man Jose Vicente Rangel with his 75 years and the elderly Governor of Barinas (Chavez’ father), to name only two cases, should also be asked to retire). Chavez does not assume himself as a democratic governor-who is always the first among equals-, obligated to respect opinions different than his and, in the case of officials designated for fixed term periods, organizations which are autonomous, with more of a reason, even if they were wrong about their positions. But that intolerance, as an example, is what is behind the brutal grab of the Supreme Court. Chavez does not make the laws, he is the law.

Moreover, much as Bush, he has elevated to the level of policy the fundamentalist slogan that those who are not with him are against him. Moreover, without any scruples, he asks fidelity to his persona, not to a project or some ideas. He is the project and towards him he asks submission.

In all personalistic regimes the collaborators of the caudillos become more and more mediocre and more willing to adulate. And also more fearful. Nobody with a minimum of his own personality resists for very long next to a caudillo that ratifies his power crushing the dignity of those that surround him. For those types of governors the loneliness of power is more accentuated, but the obsequiousness and the servility do not allow them to perceive it.

The foundation of the relationship with them is hypocrisy. When they lose their power they discover how vast and deep the pharisaic ocean that surrounded them was and how lonely they always were.

The way in which Chavez addressed the Board of the Central Bank and in particular his President Diego Luis Castellanos, telling them to resign and making clumsy personal allusions to the last one, define with clarity not only the autocratic nature of his personality, his absolute scorn for democratic values, but also his total lack of consideration, in the pure human plane, with his collaborators. Power has gone to his head.

Chavez can not conceive any relationship with him other than subordination. He does not want collaborators, he wants servants. The slightest whisp of autonomy in his surroundings drives him crazy and he rapidly draws the pistol of his insults. Castellanos as well as the rest of the members of the Board of the Central bank were appointed by Chavez. But it was enough for them to contradict him, for them to fall in disgrace.

Chavez says that the Central Bank is not Castellanos. Of course not. Neither is Chavez.

These gentlemen have a criterion, different from that of the President on the topic of the foreign exchange earnings. Whether they are right or not is not the problem, because that is not the essence of the problem. The essence is that Chavez does not tolerate that anybody differ with him, nor is he capable of debating calmly and persuasively with those that differ with him. He loses his cool and releases things as coarse as the allusion to Castellanos’ age which, according to him, is already a “little old man” who should go home and wear slippers, instead of resisting his requests. Indelicately and threatenly he pointed out that if he had to be jailed, he would have his home as prison, given his age. (By the way, with that type of disqualification, old man Jose Vicente Rangel with his 75 years and the elderly Governor of Barinas (Chavez’ father), to name only two cases, should also be asked to retire). Chavez does not assume himself as a democratic governor-who is always the first among equals-, obligated to respect opinions different than his and, in the case of officials designated for fixed term periods, organizations which are autonomous, with more of a reason, even if they were wrong about their positions. But that intolerance, as an example, is what is behind the brutal grab of the Supreme Court. Chavez does not make the laws, he is the law.

Moreover, much as Bush, he has elevated to the level of policy the fundamentalist slogan that those who are not with him are against him. Moreover, without any scruples, he asks fidelity to his persona, not to a project or some ideas. He is the project and towards him he asks submission.

In all personalistic regimes the collaborators of the caudillos become more and more mediocre and more willing to adulate. And also more fearful. Nobody with a minimum of his own personality resists for very long next to a caudillo that ratifies his power crushing the dignity of those that surround him. For those types of governors the loneliness of power is more accentuated, but the obsequiousness and the servility do not allow them to perceive it.

The foundation of the relationship with them is hypocrisy. When they lose their power they discover how vast and deep the pharisaic ocean that surrounded them was and how lonely they always were.

The way in which Chavez addressed the Board of the Central Bank and in particular his President Diego Luis Castellanos, telling them to resign and making clumsy personal allusions to the last one, define with clarity not only the autocratic nature of his personality, his absolute scorn for democratic values, but also his total lack of consideration, in the pure human plane, with his collaborators. Power has gone to his head.

Chavez can not conceive any relationship with him other than subordination. He does not want collaborators, he wants servants. The slightest whisp of autonomy in his surroundings drives him crazy and he rapidly draws the pistol of his insults. Castellanos as well as the rest of the members of the Board of the Central bank were appointed by Chavez. But it was enough for them to contradict him, for them to fall in disgrace.

Chavez says that the Central Bank is not Castellanos. Of course not. Neither is Chavez.

These gentlemen have a criterion, different from that of the President on the topic of the foreign exchange earnings. Whether they are right or not is not the problem, because that is not the essence of the problem. The essence is that Chavez does not tolerate that anybody differ with him, nor is he capable of debating calmly and persuasively with those that differ with him. He loses his cool and releases things as coarse as the allusion to Castellanos’ age which, according to him, is already a “little old man” who should go home and wear slippers, instead of resisting his requests. Indelicately and threatenly he pointed out that if he had to be jailed, he would have his home as prison, given his age. (By the way, with that type of disqualification, old man Jose Vicente Rangel with his 75 years and the elderly Governor of Barinas (Chavez’ father), to name only two cases, should also be asked to retire). Chavez does not assume himself as a democratic governor-who is always the first among equals-, obligated to respect opinions different than his and, in the case of officials designated for fixed term periods, organizations which are autonomous, with more of a reason, even if they were wrong about their positions. But that intolerance, as an example, is what is behind the brutal grab of the Supreme Court. Chavez does not make the laws, he is the law.

Moreover, much as Bush, he has elevated to the level of policy the fundamentalist slogan that those who are not with him are against him. Moreover, without any scruples, he asks fidelity to his persona, not to a project or some ideas. He is the project and towards him he asks submission.

In all personalistic regimes the collaborators of the caudillos become more and more mediocre and more willing to adulate. And also more fearful. Nobody with a minimum of his own personality resists for very long next to a caudillo that ratifies his power crushing the dignity of those that surround him. For those types of governors the loneliness of power is more accentuated, but the obsequiousness and the servility do not allow them to perceive it.

The foundation of the relationship with them is hypocrisy. When they lose their power they discover how vast and deep the pharisaic ocean that surrounded them was and how lonely they always were.

City councilman Carlos Herrera in today’s El Nacional accuses lawyer Socrates Tinaco of stealing a billion bolivars from Danilo Anderson’ apartment. Herrera says Socrates distributed this cash among some workers of the Attorney General’s office. He also says they took other property from Anderson’s home.

Now, what I would like to understand is how Herrera finds it perfectly natural that Prosecutor Anderson had some US$ 520,000 at home. How can he even say that those that took the money should be charged for theft? How can he even suggest that Anderson’s house was “dry” of money after four days? Can he explain why there was so much cash at Anderson’s home? Can he explain where he got it from? Are these numbers just the usual in the “robolucion”? Were Bermudez’ $37,000 just small change?

Herrera once again blames bankers for Anderson’s death, makes the Vice-President responsible for his safety and says that on Monday he was going to be taken away by the investigative police and a grenade was going to be planted on him, but his call to Globovision stopped the plan.

Understand, this guy is pro-Government, not opposition. Try figuring that one out!

City councilman Carlos Herrera in today’s El Nacional accuses lawyer Socrates Tinaco of stealing a billion bolivars from Danilo Anderson’ apartment. Herrera says Socrates distributed this cash among some workers of the Attorney General’s office. He also says they took other property from Anderson’s home.

Now, what I would like to understand is how Herrera finds it perfectly natural that Prosecutor Anderson had some US$ 520,000 at home. How can he even say that those that took the money should be charged for theft? How can he even suggest that Anderson’s house was “dry” of money after four days? Can he explain why there was so much cash at Anderson’s home? Can he explain where he got it from? Are these numbers just the usual in the “robolucion”? Were Bermudez’ $37,000 just small change?

Herrera once again blames bankers for Anderson’s death, makes the Vice-President responsible for his safety and says that on Monday he was going to be taken away by the investigative police and a grenade was going to be planted on him, but his call to Globovision stopped the plan.

Understand, this guy is pro-Government, not opposition. Try figuring that one out!

The Venezuelan National Institute for Statistics INE, said today that poverty had in decreased Venezuela during the month of November. According to the Head of the Institute, poverty stands now at 53% of all Venezuelans being below the poverty level. This is obviously very good news and I welcome it. In fact, this is the least I would have expected from the fact that oil prices are so high, it should have some trickle down effect.

Mr. Eljuri also said that 25% of Venezuelans live in critical poverty with the rest having income which is at least twice the “basic basket of foodstuffs”.

Now, where things get truly Goebbelian or Orwellian is when Mr. Eljuri proceeds to criticize the opposition for saying that poverty is at 70%. According to Mr. Eljuri: “the opposition commits a premeditated error by adding the number of critical poverty to the percentage of poverty in the country”

This is really funny. First of all, Mr. Eljuri succeeded Mr. Molina at the National Institute for Statistics when Chavez fired him for reporting that poverty has only increased during Chavez’ term as reported then in this blog. What is so incredible Goebbelian about this, is that it was Hough Chavez himself who propagated the false number of 80% poverty during his Presidential campaign in 1998. I wrote once a letter to a reader where I took exception to him using Chavez’ number. In fact, as far back as March 2003 in this blog, I was taking the Government to task for their poverty number which always seems to be below that of the Center at the CatholicUniversity that has been studying poverty for the last thirty years. (It is so cool to have a blog for so long that everything is there on the record!)

But now that the revolution has control of everything, they want to say it was the opposition that spread the 80% number, or simply, they want to say Chavez reduced it from 80% to the current 53%. Whatever the reason may be in the twisted and perverse minds of this fake revolution, it is another bizarre attempt at changing history. As my own charting programs for Mac’s used to say: Do you want to change history? It would ask in Russian: Da! or No! You figure it out.

The Venezuelan National Institute for Statistics INE, said today that poverty had in decreased Venezuela during the month of November. According to the Head of the Institute, poverty stands now at 53% of all Venezuelans being below the poverty level. This is obviously very good news and I welcome it. In fact, this is the least I would have expected from the fact that oil prices are so high, it should have some trickle down effect.

Mr. Eljuri also said that 25% of Venezuelans live in critical poverty with the rest having income which is at least twice the “basic basket of foodstuffs”.

Now, where things get truly Goebbelian or Orwellian is when Mr. Eljuri proceeds to criticize the opposition for saying that poverty is at 70%. According to Mr. Eljuri: “the opposition commits a premeditated error by adding the number of critical poverty to the percentage of poverty in the country”

This is really funny. First of all, Mr. Eljuri succeeded Mr. Molina at the National Institute for Statistics when Chavez fired him for reporting that poverty has only increased during Chavez’ term as reported then in this blog. What is so incredible Goebbelian about this, is that it was Hough Chavez himself who propagated the false number of 80% poverty during his Presidential campaign in 1998. I wrote once a letter to a reader where I took exception to him using Chavez’ number. In fact, as far back as March 2003 in this blog, I was taking the Government to task for their poverty number which always seems to be below that of the Center at the CatholicUniversity that has been studying poverty for the last thirty years. (It is so cool to have a blog for so long that everything is there on the record!)

But now that the revolution has control of everything, they want to say it was the opposition that spread the 80% number, or simply, they want to say Chavez reduced it from 80% to the current 53%. Whatever the reason may be in the twisted and perverse minds of this fake revolution, it is another bizarre attempt at changing history. As my own charting programs for Mac’s used to say: Do you want to change history? It would ask in Russian: Da! or No! You figure it out.

The Venezuelan Foreign Minister Ali Rodriguez called on the opposition to be serious about the border discussions that are taking place with Colombia. This is response to Primero Justicia leader Julio Borges who said that a Colombian newspaper had quoted a Colombian negotiator as saying that Venezuela had recognized that country’s rights to the Gulf of Venezuela.

Borges immediately replied to Rodriguez saying that his reply lacked clarity as it did not address what the Colombian publication said and it was incredible that Venezuelans had to find out about it via a foreign publication.

My response would have been:

Who should be serious here? The Minister of Foreign relations was President of PDVSA for the last two and a half years where he:

-Has been telling us for over a year that the country is producing 600,000 barrels more than either OPEC or AEI say.

-Has been promising since June the financial statements of PDVSA will be ready next month and they are not ready yet.

-Authorized the repurchase of PDVSA’s US$ 2.5 billion dollars an outrageous price simply to protect the rear ends of the members of the Board of PDVSA (including his own) who would have been in violation of US law, in particular the recently enacted Sarbanes Oxley Law.

-Promised all of his collaborators at PDVSA that he would not take political revenge on them.

-Confiscated the funds from the voluntary pension plans of 20,000 PDVSA workers.

Yes Mr. Rodriguez, let’s be serious! Why don’t you start, your track record ain’t very good. Did you know Government should be subject to a higher standard?

The Venezuelan Foreign Minister Ali Rodriguez called on the opposition to be serious about the border discussions that are taking place with Colombia. This is response to Primero Justicia leader Julio Borges who said that a Colombian newspaper had quoted a Colombian negotiator as saying that Venezuela had recognized that country’s rights to the Gulf of Venezuela.

Borges immediately replied to Rodriguez saying that his reply lacked clarity as it did not address what the Colombian publication said and it was incredible that Venezuelans had to find out about it via a foreign publication.

My response would have been:

Who should be serious here? The Minister of Foreign relations was President of PDVSA for the last two and a half years where he:

-Has been telling us for over a year that the country is producing 600,000 barrels more than either OPEC or AEI say.

-Has been promising since June the financial statements of PDVSA will be ready next month and they are not ready yet.

-Authorized the repurchase of PDVSA’s US$ 2.5 billion dollars an outrageous price simply to protect the rear ends of the members of the Board of PDVSA (including his own) who would have been in violation of US law, in particular the recently enacted Sarbanes Oxley Law.

-Promised all of his collaborators at PDVSA that he would not take political revenge on them.

-Confiscated the funds from the voluntary pension plans of 20,000 PDVSA workers.

Yes Mr. Rodriguez, let’s be serious! Why don’t you start, your track record ain’t very good. Did you know Government should be subject to a higher standard?

The Venezuelan Foreign Minister Ali Rodriguez called on the opposition to be serious about the border discussions that are taking place with Colombia. This is response to Primero Justicia leader Julio Borges who said that a Colombian newspaper had quoted a Colombian negotiator as saying that Venezuela had recognized that country’s rights to the Gulf of Venezuela.

Borges immediately replied to Rodriguez saying that his reply lacked clarity as it did not address what the Colombian publication said and it was incredible that Venezuelans had to find out about it via a foreign publication.

My response would have been:

Who should be serious here? The Minister of Foreign relations was President of PDVSA for the last two and a half years where he:

-Has been telling us for over a year that the country is producing 600,000 barrels more than either OPEC or AEI say.

-Has been promising since June the financial statements of PDVSA will be ready next month and they are not ready yet.

-Authorized the repurchase of PDVSA’s US$ 2.5 billion dollars an outrageous price simply to protect the rear ends of the members of the Board of PDVSA (including his own) who would have been in violation of US law, in particular the recently enacted Sarbanes Oxley Law.

-Promised all of his collaborators at PDVSA that he would not take political revenge on them.

-Confiscated the funds from the voluntary pension plans of 20,000 PDVSA workers.

Yes Mr. Rodriguez, let’s be serious! Why don’t you start, your track record ain’t very good. Did you know Government should be subject to a higher standard?